| |  | |
Commonwealth
Forests | | |
 What's in a name?
Can forestry be considered a discipline worthy of a university education, or is it a technical
subject for which a non-university diploma is sufficient? Forestry as a broad academic
discipline includes the full range of forest-related natural and social sciences. However, in most
universities, forestry has never been considered sufficiently important to rank its own Faculty.
Where it has, these faculties are often small relative to the rest of the university and in danger
of amalgamation with other faculties. This partly reflects the decline in enrolment into
traditional forestry programmes, and a number of different approaches have been adopted in an
attempt to shore up student enrolment. Some universities have changed the names of their
forestry departments in the belief that the terms ‘forestry’ and ‘forester’ has too many adverse
connotations. Others have lowered their entrance standards, a policy that has repeatedly been
shown to be ill-advised. There are no clear answers to whether or not the discipline of forestry
should remain distinctive. For some, there are advantages in maintaining the whole, especially
with the rise of interest in environmental issues and tracking the origin of products. Wood
products are increasingly linked to their origin through the chain-of-custody requirements of
certification – many people wish to know whether a product they are purchasing is derived from
a sustainably managed resource. Those working in forestry faculties generally have a common
interest, namely forests and their products, and the synergies that can be developed through
people from different academic backgrounds working together on common problems is
substantial.
|
